Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So, I'm compiling a brief list of points to state in tomorrow's mediation call.  So, it would seem that I have to come to an agreement of some sort. Seeing as most of the defence, lack of genuine paperwork evidence from the claimant, mild threats etc. seems to go in my favour, is it best to mediate for that agreement or to let it run to court?  Short of the 6 year rule playing out, I'm going to have to pay up somehow, so why don't I just end it tomorrow? By paying I mean, not hurling myself off a cliff.    
    • @ReuTheo Thanks very much. Coincidentally, it has now been exactly over 1 year since I sent my parcel with Evri and began my enquiries with them as to where my parcel is (and eventually coming to this forum / starting this thread). I understand how you are feeling. It's why I kept this thread active and detailed, so anyone who reads it, can clearly understand what was happening at each stage of the process, so they don't feel anxious or overwhelmed with the process through MCOL, mediation, arranging for trial, working through the WS / Court bundle, and finally going in front of a judge. The work has been put in so hopefully you (and everyone else) now has a good WS template to use and build the case. I agree the legal language and specifics are not easy to understand at first glance by layman / non-legal persons. What I found useful is reading the WS and researching some of the Acts in my own time so that I could understand the legal speak. This reading / research really helped me to have a clear idea of what the rules/laws are and how they apply to my case (and likely your case also). As you know, this is a self-help forum so you certainly got to put in the time/work to understand your case/argument. It will be worth it in the end (I say this from personal experience - given this time last year, I was banging my head against a wall with Evri and couldn't see the light at the end of the tunnel). Above all else, the team on this forum such as @BankFodder and @jk2054 are a tremendous help with getting the WS in the right state and giving guidance. Don't be afraid to ask questions on this forum - it's for your ultimate benefit (even if sometimes the responses seem harsh - don't take it personally. If my experience is anything to go by, it'll help give clarity and maybe even close a potential gap in your case). Good luck with your case.
    • Savers are pouring money into cash Isas as they look to protect the interest on their nest eggs from tax. They put more than £11bn into cash Isas in April.View the full article
    • The stock ended the trading day at nearly $136, up 3.5%, making it more valuable than Microsoft.View the full article
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3253 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Just a bit of initial advice.

Just had a friend on the phone who has received a NOE from Andrew Wilson.

Background;

Friend split from his wife and moved out. He has moved in with a friend for the time being. He had a dispute with his accountant over extra fees that were charged that he did not agree to. He is not sure if this went to court (told him to check credit file) but I feel that it may have done.

AW say they will be visiting the address he is now living at on Monday.

He is the director (sole) of his Ltd company and the NOE is in that name not his personal.

He has no personal possessions (other than clothes) where he is now living but does have the company van, tools etc.

 

I have told him to register on here to give the story in more detail but he won't be back from work until after 5pm.

 

Any advice that I can may be give him.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1. Check trust online for CCJ - in personal and LTD company name.

 

2. Check credit files for CCJ if needed.

 

3. Failing the above, get the references off AW.

 

4. Did the accountant work for LTD company or him personally ? In what manner is the disputed invoice addressed.

 

The EA can seize anything belonging to the LTD company, including vehicles. They will do this if the amount is not settled by prior arrangement.

 

The alternative is to seek a set aside / stay. Was the claim not defended or was there no knowledge.

 

A bit of document gathering will be required, getting information from the CC - AW should provide the reference number.

 

I am sure more will respond later

 

N

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply.

Question re the vehicle - he is a one man band so can the vehicle be seized if it will stop him from working.

 

The dispute is about extra charges. He was charged an annual fee by the accountant which he was ok with. He was then told by phone that they needed to do some extra work on 2 years accounts and quoted a price nearly twice that of the annual fee (not inc the annual fee). Hr agreed this was ok but when the work was done he was invoiced the amount that was 4 times the annual fee. The accountant said that he agreed this verbally. e said that he agreed the fee as quoted, it was never mentioned that this was for each year.

 

I will find out if the accountant was working personally or via a company. He did mention that he sometimes paid the fee cash and sometimes by cheque.

 

Will check trust online & cred rep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the van is registered to the Ltd company and the noe relates to the Ltd company yes as it is an asset of the company.

 

I assume he is both a director and employee of Ltd company ?

 

If the van is registered to him personally and it it seized then that's a no no. Won't stop an enthusiastic hceo from attempting to seize it but there would be recourse.

 

Need to find out more about the judgement.

 

Would be helpful to post up removing identifiable information.

 

Looks like the claim was not defended.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the van is registered to the Ltd company and the noe relates to the Ltd company yes as it is an asset of the company.

 

I assume he is both a director and employee of Ltd company ?

 

If the van is registered to him personally and it it seized then that's a no no. Won't stop an enthusiastic hceo from attempting to seize it but there would be recourse.

 

Need to find out more about the judgement.

 

Would be helpful to post up removing identifiable information.

 

Looks like the claim was not defended.

 

It makes no difference who it is REGISTERED to. It will be up to the EA to decide on whether to remove or not. The debtor, or the third party, will need to provide proof of ownership, not proof of registered keeper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes no difference who it is REGISTERED to. It will be up to the EA to decide on whether to remove or not. The debtor, or the third party, will need to provide proof of ownership, not proof of registered keeper.

 

I have always valued your advice Grumpy but on this point I have to disagree.

 

There are at least three different legislations that state that unless the contrary is proved.....that the registered keeper is assumed to be the owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a look at the paperwork that has been received. On the face of it looks like no leg to stand on as all seems to be in order.

 

Letter dated 03/02/15 from solicitors requesting payment sent to his current address.

Claim form dated 23/02/15 sent to correct address.

Judgement dated 23/03/15 sent to correct address.

NOE dated 01/07/15 sent to correct address with an enforcement time and date. Enforcement date is 13/07/15.

 

All in the company name. The only assets the company has are the van and tools.

 

Just about the get the docs scanned on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

J

 

Background;

 

Friend split from his wife and moved out. He has moved in with a friend for the time being. He had a dispute with his accountant over extra fees that were charged that he did not agree to. He is not sure if this went to court (told him to check credit file) but I feel that it may have done.

 

AW say they will be visiting the address he is now living at on Monday.

 

He is the director (sole) of his Ltd company and the NOE is in that name not his personal. He has no personal possessions (other than clothes) where he is now living but does have the company van, tools etc. Thanks

 

I have looked at the paperwork that you have displayed and at first glance it does all appear in order.

 

On the Notice of Enforcement it states that the notice was issued on 1st July and that your friend has been given until 4pm today (13th July) to either make payment or put forward a payment proposal. I am therefore at a loss to understand why your friend was told on the telephone that a visit would be made today !!!

 

Since the introduction of the new(ish) regulations in April 2014 it is the case that with judgments passed to High Court enforcement agencies that a significant percentage are subject to payment arrangements and if you friend cannot pay, then he needs to make a proposal by no later than 4pm today.

 

If a payment proposal is made, the you need to advise your friend that the statutory regulations state that in EVERY such case it is necessary for the enforcement agent to make a personal visit to ascertain that there are no goods available. This is only applicable to High Court debts and is because the Enforcement Agent has a personal obligation to the creditor and accordingly, he has a duty to report back to the creditor what the position is regarding the debtors assets etc. That personal visit attracts an Enforcement Fee of £190 plus vat .

 

The following is a copy of the statutory Explanatory Memorandum supporting the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014 and paragraph 7.3 states as follows:

 

The fee structure for High Court cases also introduces an incentive to enter into, and adhere to, an affordable controlled goods agreement. Unless a debtor pays in full at the compliance stage, the enforcement agent is obliged to visit the debtor in every High Court case in order to take control of goods, thereby triggering the first enforcement stage. If the enforcement agent is then unable to enter into a controlled goods agreement (and has to take control of goods in another manner) or a debtor defaults on a controlled goods agreement, the enforcement agent will be under an obligation to remove goods and therefore the second enforcement stage fee will also apply.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/pdfs/uksiem_20140001_en.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BA.

As the CCJ & NOE are in his company name does that mean they could only take company assets.

 

He is a one man band builder, his only company assets are his van and his tools. He currently lodges with a friend as he is going through a separation (probably lead to divorce). The address on the NOE is his friends house.

 

Also, if he makes a payment arrangement could he still apply for a set aside (if it is possible). He does not dispute that he owes some monies but disputes the amount.

 

When the judgement was originally made he called the solicitor to offer up a payment solution. He offered x upfront and y monthly and was told this would be acceptable, this was on a friday. On the monday he called to make the initial payment, which the solicitor took but was then told the monthly payment was not acceptable so he has not done anything since. Stupidly he did not get the written confirmation of the original acceptance. Also, despite numerous requests, he has never received a receipt for the initial payment he made.

 

He realises that he should have dealt with this at the time but was a little to trusting which, added to his marriage break up, meant that he has not quite been on the ball for some time.

 

Thanks for your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BA.

 

Also, if he makes a payment arrangement could he still apply for a set aside (if it is possible). He does not dispute that he owes some monies but disputes the amount.

 

He realises that he should have dealt with this at the time but was a little to trusting which, added to his marriage break up, meant that he has not quite been on the ball for some time. Thanks for your time.

 

He COULD apply for a 'set aside' but it should be pointed out that courts are really starting to clamp down on this applications given that many times, the N244 is submitted purely in order to halt further enforcement. The deciding factor is whether there is a sufficiently good enough defence to the actual debt itself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks BA.

As the CCJ & NOE are in his company name does that mean they could only take company assets.

 

He is a one man band builder, his only company assets are his van and his tools. He currently lodges with a friend as he is going through a separation (probably lead to divorce). The address on the NOE is his friends house.

 

Thanks for your time.

 

The enforcement agent can only take control of goods that actually belong to the debtor. There are some exemptions...one being that a vehicle for self employment is considered exempt if its value is below £1,350. This figure is generally considered to be a 'trade' value.

 

What is the position with his vehicle?

 

Is it on finance?

 

How much roughly is it worth?

 

Is it sign written?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always valued your advice Grumpy but on this point I have to disagree.

 

There are at least three different legislations that state that unless the contrary is proved.....that the registered keeper is assumed to be the owner.

 

 

Lets look at this another way..

 

 

Motability own the vehicle and the driver is the registered keeper so that rule does not apply sorry to say

If I have been of any help, please click on my star and leave a note to let me know, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He COULD apply for a 'set aside' but it should be pointed out that courts are really starting to clamp down on this applications given that many times, the N244 is submitted purely in order to halt further enforcement. The deciding factor is whether there is a sufficiently good enough defence to the actual debt itself.

 

The action is from his accountant. He has paid his fees every year and was then told that they needed to do a more in depth set of accounts for 2 years (probably an audit). He was told a figure of x so agreed the work could be done, this was all verbal. When the work was done he was invoiced for figure x for each year. I have seen the accounts and to be honest they do not seem any different to what a normal set of accounts look like (i see many through my job). So the fact is he does not dispute that he owes some monies, just the amount.

 

He knows that he should have dealt with this earlier but cannot change that now. He was also prepared to set up a payment plan which was ultimately refused. He has now moved area so work is very slow as he is building up again so spare capital is at a premium.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The enforcement agent can only take control of goods that actually belong to the debtor. There are some exemptions...one being that a vehicle for self employment is considered exempt if its value is below £1,350. This figure is generally considered to be a 'trade' value.

 

What is the position with his vehicle?

 

Is it on finance?

 

How much roughly is it worth?

 

Is it sign written?

 

As far as I know there is no finance on the van. It is sign written and probably worth £2-3 K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If he parks round the corner could they still take it as it is sign written. If so he could remove the sign writing. Also by taking his van he is then unable to work so what is the point, and what would happen to the tools etc he keeps in the van?

 

Ultimately he wants to resolve this but feels he has been misled by his accountant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is sign written then that is as good as putting a "come & get me" on it. Is it one of these where you remove the sign writing that you can still see what was there, if made on a panel then that may be worth a try. Don't forget the accountant may have advised the HCEO about the van. Whether he has been misled or not is another argument it is more important to try and address what happens next.

 

Normally I would suggest trying to make a claim for a Stay of Execution to prevent further enforcement and/or charges. This time He may have a job doing that as he has known for some time about the outstanding debt and imagine a Judge will do the same and refuse the application. As others have mentioned it may be better to file for a Variation Order but would suggest it be payable within say 6 months. Providing it is kept up with then everything should be OK.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it is sign written then that is as good as putting a "come & get me" on it. Is it one of these where you remove the sign writing that you can still see what was there, if made on a panel then that may be worth a try. Don't forget the accountant may have advised the HCEO about the van. Whether he has been misled or not is another argument it is more important to try and address what happens next.

 

Normally I would suggest trying to make a claim for a Stay of Execution to prevent further enforcement and/or charges. This time He may have a job doing that as he has known for some time about the outstanding debt and imagine a Judge will do the same and refuse the application. As others have mentioned it may be better to file for a Variation Order but would suggest it be payable within say 6 months. Providing it is kept up with then everything should be OK.

 

Thanks,

Looking up 'variation order', this may be an option as his income is currently quite low. The original claim was for £3200 (plus int @ 8%), which is strange as the invoices are for £3600. The CCJ is for £3536 (inc costs), he then paid approx £400 to the solicitor with an offer of £100pm until work picks up, This was declined and they requested £280pm. The next thing was the NOE for £3578. As this is on the company would the affordability be taken from the company funds as at the moment there is very little going through.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just found out that there is finance owing on the van. Approx £3000 o/s on a value of approx £10k. Shows what I know about van values.

 

Is it worth him contacting the HEO today to try to arrange payment plan or should he tell them that he will be applying for a variation order.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

If hedecides to go for the Variation then there is no need to tell nyone. There is no guarantee that an application will succeeed as any I&E will have to support it. On top of that will be the fact the Judgment will have been to pay Forthwith & some Judges can be reluctant to let you pay in instalments.

 

You mention making an arrangement with the HCEO. This is a possibility but he should be asking the Claimant if they accept - if they have alreday turned an offer down it may not succeed. Also the HCEO to abide by the conditions of the Writ will need to attend to take Control of Goods so should he default then the Goods can be removed. They will also charge him for doing this.

 

If a repayment via the HCEO is taken he must also bear in mind that any payments made will be shared. Say he pays £200 per month it could be only £120 gets passed over the remainder going to fees + interest continues to be added. It is a very difficult situation to be in.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...